Where Our Civilization is Going–If Anyplace
Llord Aidoo, long-time 2GreenEnergy reader, comments: At least there’s (now a) visionary purpose that’ll ultimately lead to founding a somewhat new civilization – this time one whose energy dynamics are not dependent on incinerating other basic lifeforms.
My personal belief is that fossil fuels is not what’s going to kill this civilization; it’s greed and selfishness. Yes, this is manifesting itself in terms of a bunch of billionaires who, so as to become even richer, are destroying our planet via greenhouse gas build-up, but if it hadn’t been coal, oil and natural gas, it would have been something else. In fact, there is a strong possibility that, if we make it that far, once internal combustion engines are replaced by electric vehicles, we’ll have a new struggle for lithium, cobalt, or some such.
I hope I’m wrong, but part of me joins the group that believes we’re headed for extinction based on our moral depravity.
Eternal vigilance! That’s what is required to salvage humans and our habitat from extinction. And whether you’ll freely admit it or not, your efforts, however minuscule, put you amongst the ranks of the Eternal Watchers. Finally, what will the antidote be to the machinations of the morally depraved (in this case, our modern-day incarnates of the “Robber Barons”)? It’ll be when the altruists and outrageously inventive, and all those earnestly concerned with righting the true course of progress don’t sit still with folded arms as out-of-control degeneracies become the norm. As to our common engagements, heaven permitting, I’m connecting with you sooner than later. And whilst we’re at these proverbial oars, Craig, Let’s Keep Hope Alive!
Craig and Llord,
Wow, such ardent sermonizing and noble preaching !
Hmmm…, maybe I’m just an old cynic, but inspiring as all these idealistic platitudes may be, (I’m sure you will soon included Mom and apple pie ), I just can’t help wondering if all this idealism isn’t just an excuse for not doing anything practical while loudly condemning those whose activities allow the the sort of society that can afford to accomodate such sanctimonious ‘philosophers’.
But, as I say, maybe I’m just being cynical.
However,it seems to me your description of yourselves as ‘eternal watchers’ is accurate. You just ‘watch’ and pass judgement on those who actually perform useful and practical services for their fellow human beings.
Oh, how you hate large corporations and certain billionaires (well, at least those who don’t back the democrats) but then a cynic could attribute your attitude to simple envy and realization of your relative lack of influence and accomplishment.
In the realm of idealism, self-righteous platitudes are okay, after all they make you feel better and convince you of the righteousness of your cause. you can enjoy a smug sense of superiority while being on the side of the angels.
In the real world, here on planet Earth, the rest of us “deplorables” must deal with real world problems and practical solutions.
If you wish to be “unselfish and idealistic, that’s great! I would be the first to defend your right to live your life according to your own philosophic convictions. The problem starts when you begin evangelizing and passing judgement on others.
The problem with criticizing others, is you open yourself to the same scrutiny.
Craig, for instance, hates Exxon and all oil companies (and all their evil works) yet buys their products, despite living in the State where the first really practical electric car is produced.
His fellow travelers, whose battle cry of, “leave it in the ground” can be heard at every gathering of watermelons, would not hesitate to avail themselves of the services provided by Fire brigades, Police, Para-medics , ambulance and other emergency services etc, none of which would exist if oil and gas was really “left in the ground”.
It might be more useful investigated what practical action you could undertake in your own life to live up to your preaching, before wasting time on ranting about others being morally depraved or degenerate.
But then that’s always been a problem for the “perpetually outraged and morally virtuous”, they end up becoming parodies of themselves.
I’ll be first to admit: Outside the gates of Heaven, there’s no perfect system anywhere. (And, Marcopolo, although I’m bound by common rules to respond to your assertions, I’ll concede your prose quality is high indeed. But your line “…In the real world…the rest of us ”deplorables” – I find rather odd. Ever since the unleashing of “deplorables” as a demographic description, I’ve thought it substanceless.) Now, anyone believing in dealing “with real world problems and practical solutions” in these times is examplary. This 21st century, perhaps unlike any other period in history, is throwing to man multitudes of challenges – of which, sorry about sounding alarmist, a looming climate catastrophe is foremost. And to pretend our future is as lush as yesteryears should be troubling. To fault or thumb our noses at those seeking to invent our safety reminds of those deriding the Ark builders. (Wasn’t that some climate disaster then?) But you’re right: the option isn’t just watching and doing nothing about GHG!
Hi Llord,
Thank you for your reply.
Mu use of the term “deplorables was really directed at Craig, an ardent supporter of the demographic who employ such terms to describe the common man.
The Twenty-first century will indeed present many challenges, but solutions won’t be found in railing against the “greed and selfishness of a bunch of billionaires”.
Nor will using “climate Change” as a excuse to re-cycle old fashioned political ideologies with long since failed economic dogma, assist the environment, on the contrary, such activity is counter-productive.
The answer lies in advanced technology, evolution rather than revolution. (It’s true revolutions devour their own children).
The process is already underway, but hindered by ideologues and mistrust of alarmists, whose outrageous claims increasingly reveal hidden political agenda.
Emerging technologies need sustained economic prosperity and investor confidence to develop and become adopted. This process can be helped, but not forced. Technologies need time to prove their worth and many will fall by the wayside or be superseded.
As individuals we can assist by becoming consumers of more environmental, but practical technologies.
Demanding only one type of technology become a panacea at the expense of other technologies, is foolish since the evolutionary process is not able to be directed in accordance with any political doctrine.